Maynard v. Holder
HENRY MAYNARD and Wife, DESSIE MAYNARD, v. GENEVA MARTIN HOLDER, Widow; GRACIE HOLDER JONES and ROBERT JONES, Her Husband; CLOIE HOLDER WALL and DUTCH WALL, Her Husband; BERDIE HOLDER WALL and ROSCOE WALL, Her Husband; VALLIE HOLDER HODGE and ARTHUR HODGE, Her Husband; And NANNIE HOLDER JACKSON and ALVESTA J. JACKSON, Her Husband
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
It is prescribed by C. S., 1743: “An action may be brought by any person against another who claims an estate or interest in real property adverse to him for the purpose of determining such adverse claims.”
Giving a liberal construction to this remedial statute, it is apparent that the court below was in error in dismissing this action. The pleadings were sufficient to raise an issue under which the court could proceed to determine the rights of the parties.
Satterwhite v. Gallagher, 173 N. C., 525 , 92 S. E., 369 ;
Hardware Co. v. Cotton Co., 188 N. C., 442 , 124 S. E., 756 .
Reversed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.